prehensive knowledge can be implemented if it has practical consequences for any aspect of [performing a religious obligation].
Some of those who believe that alterations have been made in the Quran may claim that the guidance that the infallible Imams provide for reasoning on the basis of the apparent meanings of the Quran, and their confirming their followers on ad‌ herence to it, establish the evidential character of the apparent meanings of!he Quran, even though this character had formerly been lost because of alteration.
Nonetheless, this assertion is unsound, because this guidance from the infallible
Imams, and this stipulation to their followers to adhere to the apparent meanings of the Quran, result from the Quran itself being an [unaltered], independent proof, and not because they wanted to take the initiative in making it so.

Permission to Recite the Chapters in the $a/at (Ritual Prayers)

The fourth [source of] proof [that alteration did not occur]: The Imams of the Prophets Family have ordered the recitation of a complete sura of the Quran after the recita‌ tion of "al-Fata).a" (the Opening Sura) in the first two cycles of the obligatory prayer, and have decided that it is permissible to divide one sura or more [between the first two cycles] of the prayer with verses.٢٧
It is clear that these rulings were established in the Sharia when the prayer was
ordained, and that precautionary dissimulation (taqiyya) is not at all involved here. Consequently, for those who maintain that the Quran was altered, it is necessary that they should not recite any sura that is likely to have been altered, because a defi‌ nite obligation requires a definite exemption [for the performer to be released from its execution]. A person who holds the alteration view may claim that he cannot find a complete sura [free of possible alteration]. In that case, it is not obligatory for him [to recite a complete sura in the prayer], because the divine ordinances are appli‌ cable to those who are capof performing them. Nevertheless, this claim is accu‌ rate if one maintains that alteration has occurred in all the suras of the Quran.
But if there is a chapter, like "Surat al-Tawi).Id" (sura ١١٢), in which there is no probability of alteration, then it is necessary for him to recite nothing else. Moreover, a person maintaining the existence of alterations may not take the permission the Imams granted to the worshipers to read any chapter in the daily prayer as sufficient proof that he may select any sura [for recitation], when it was not permissible for him to regard it as sufficient before the permission [of the Imams], because of the alteration [consideration]. This is because the permission from the Imams [to do that] is, in it‌ self, evidence that no alteration has occurred in the Quran; otherwise, [this permis‌ sion] would have necessarily rendered the obligatory prayer [recital] discharged [by nullifying the recitation of the altered suras] without a pressing reason. For it is obvi‌ ous that the required recitation of unaltered suras does not constitute an infraction of precautionary dissimulation (taqiyya). In fact, we see that the Imams have recom‌ mended to their followers that they recite the "al-Tawi).Id" and "al-Qadar" in all the daily prayers. What, then, prevented them from making these two, or any other verses in which there is no likelihood of alteration, obligatory [for recitation in the prayer]?